Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Senator Do Amaral’

Council Bill SR 1186: To establish a University Wide Elections Code

February 21, 2011 2 comments

Agenda Item: SR 1186 – To establish a University Wide Elections Code
Date: February 20, 2011
Committee: Rules, Legislative and Judiciary Committee
Sponsors: Hector Mujica, College of Business Administration Senator; Rachel Emas, University Graduate School Senator, Adam Do Amaral, College of Education Senator; Jesus Borrero, College of Arts and Sciences Senator; Clement Giraneza, College of Public Health and Social Work Senator;

Text

Status

  • Retracted.

Final Vote

  • In favor: ; Opposed: ; Abstentions: ;


Advertisements

Council Bill SR 1066: To Amend the Procedures of Legislation for SGC-MMC

November 11, 2010 2 comments

Agenda Item: To Amend the Procedures of Legislation of SGC-MMC       Date: November 15th, 2010____

Committee: Rules, Legislation, & Judiciary Committee

Sponsors: Jesus Borrero College of Arts & Sciences Senator, Rachel Emas Graduate Senator, Adam do Amaral College of Education Senator

To Amend the Procedures of Legislation for  SGC-MMC

SECTION I. Short Title

This bill may be cited as the “Legislation Submission Bill”

SECTION II. Purpose

The purpose of the Legislation Submission Bill is to ensure all Senators have easy access and ample time to consider legislation before proposal at SGC-MMC Senate meetings.

SECTION III. Updating the Procedures section of SGC-MMC Statutes.

ARTICLE XII: Procedures

Section 12.01 Procedures

(a)        Any bills, resolutions, and amendments presented to the Senate for the purpose of a vote must first have two (2) Senators as sponsors in order to be brought before the Senate as             new business.

(b)        All legislation must be posted on the SGCA-MMC wordpress.com channel website and submitted to the entire SGC-MMC Senate, by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday prior to the Ssenate meeting during which the legislation will be considered. Legislation not submitted to the entire SGC-MMC Senate may still be considered with a 2/3 approval vote of the Senate Senators present at the meeting.

In favor: ; Opposed: ; Abstentions:; Status: Read once, tabled.

Council Bill SR 1050: To reform the Censure and Removal Policy of the SGC-MMC

September 24, 2010 2 comments

Agenda Item: To reform the Censure and Removal Policy of the SGC-MMC Date: September 24, 2010

Committee: Rules, Legislative and Judiciary Committee Sponsors: Moses Aluicio, College of Arts & Sciences Senator; Rachel Emas, Graduate Senator; Hector Mujica, College of Business Senator; Adam do Amaral, College of Education Senator; Jesus Borrero, College of Arts & Sciences Senator

To reform the Censure and Removal Policy of the SGC-MMC

SECTION I. Short Title

This bill may be cited as the “The Censure and Removal Policy Reform Act of 2010”

SECTION II. Removal of Existing Censure and Removal Statutes

Section 4.07 Censure and Removal of Senators

(a)        Senators should be referred for Judicial Review for failure to complete duties as stated in the SGC- MMC Bylaws, Article 4 and 5, This evaluation shall be based on reports by the Speaker that has been confirmed by the Pro-Temp.   The required written grievance may be submitted by any member of the student body and Vice President.

Section 12.01 Censure and Removal

(a)        Please Refer to Article VII. of the SGA Constitution for grounds of censure and removal.

(b)        Upon the decided validity of a written complaint/grievance by the Student Judiciary, the Chief Justice and the SGC-MMC Advisor will schedule an information session with the charged student to inform him/her of the allegation, charges, student rights, and an explanation of the judicial process. The information session will also take into account the charged student’s academic schedule for consideration of their later scheduled hearing.

(c)        Once the SGC-MMC Judicial Board Hearing is scheduled, the charged student shall be notified within five (5) business days by the SGC-MMC Chief Justice of: the time, date, and location of the SGC-MMC Judicial Board hearing, and, notice of witnesses who will be called to testify against him/her. The charged student will receive written notice of the decision within 10 business days of the hearing.  Should the charged student not present him/herself at the hearing, the hearing will take place and a decision will be rendered in absentia.

SECTION III. Addition of the Censure and Removal Procedures Outlined in the SGA Constitution

Section 12.01 Censure and Removal

a) The Senate shall have the power to censure any SGC officials. Censure shall be an official reprimand on behalf of the Senate and will proceed as follows:

(i)         A censure against any official shall be approved by a simple majority of the       Senate.

(ii)        A censure must occur in the form of a Resolution, where the stanzas provide the reasoning and evidence justifying the censure.

(iii)       Censures may be considered as evidence of malfeasance, misfeasance or nonfeasance as applicable for cases before the Supreme Court and/or impeachment trial.

b)         The Senate shall have the power to impeach, which is the formal charge of misfeasance, malfeasance, or nonfeasance, and remove any SGC official; this will proceed as follows:

(i)         Any Senator may motion for impeachment of any SGC official, after which the Senate will enter into debate on the motion.

1)         During debate, the Senator or Committee motioning for impeachment may present evidence to support their reasons for instigating impeachment.

(ii)        Following debate on the motion of impeachment, impeachment shall be instigated by a three fifths (3/5) vote of the entire Senate membership.

(iii)       Following the instigation of impeachment of the SGC official, the SGC-MMC Internal Affairs Committee shall be ordered to compile a report of the official in question’s official actions. This committee report shall be submitted to the SGC official being investigated five (5) business days prior to the trial. This report shall be presented to the Senate as evidence during the impeachment trial. The official in question has the right to rebut any evidence presented against them, provide witnesses to present testimony on their behalf, and direct questions at the Chair presiding over the trial to rebut witness testimony.

1)         Should any member of the Internal Affairs Committee be the subject of this investigation, they shall recuse themselves from the committee until the investigation has been concluded.

(iv)       The trial shall take place two (2) weeks after the formal impeachment.

(v)        The Chief Justice from the same SGC as the impeached official shall preside over the impeachment trial.

1)         Should the Chief Justice from one SGC be impeached, the Chief Justice from the other SGC shall preside. Should both Chief Justices be impeached, the Senate shall choose a member of either Supreme Court to preside over the trial.

(vi)      Immediately following the impeachment  trial, the Senate shall vote on whether they find the SGC official in question guilty of charges of misfeasance, malfeasance, or nonfeasance as presented in the original motion of impeachment.

1)         After the impeachment trial, if the SGC-MMC Official is found not guilty, the Official shall immediately resume the duties of his/her office. If the SGC-MMC Official is found guilty,  a two thirds (2/3) vote of the entire Senate membership shall remove the impeached official from office. If the Senate fails to remove the impeached SGC official, the official in question may be censured by the Senate with a simple majority vote of the entire Senate membership.

2)         If the Senate removes an SGC-MMC official after the impeachment trial, said individual shall be ineligible to hold office in any capacity within the Student Government Association for one (1) academic year semester from the date of removal.

Section 12.02 Judicial Hearing Procedure

(a)        Any SGC official can be referred for judicial hearing for misfeasance, malfeasance, or nonfeasance as stated in the SGC- MMC Statutes. This review shall be instigated by a written grievance, filed as a writ of certiorari, which may be submitted by any member of the student body to the Supreme Court.

(i)         Upon the decided validity of the grievance, the SGC-MMC Chief Justice and the SGC-MMC Advisor will schedule an information session with the charged SGC official under investigation official to inform him/her of the allegation, charges, student’s rights, and an explanation of the judicial hearing process. The information session will also take into account the charged student’s academic schedule for consideration of their later scheduled hearing.

(ii)        Once the judicial hearing is scheduled, the SGC official under investigation shall be notified within five (5) business days by the SGC-MMC Chief Justice of: the time, date, and location of the SGC-MMC judicial hearing, and, notice of witnesses who will be called to testify against him/her.

(iii)       Prior to the hearing, the SGC-MMC Internal Affairs Committee shall compile a report of the official actions of the SGC Official in question; this report shall be used as evidence during the hearing. This report shall be submitted to the SGC official being investigated five (5) business days prior to the hearing.

(iv)       Should the charged student not present him/herself at the hearing, the hearing will take place and a decision will be rendered in absentia.

(v)        The hearing will be recorded for documentation purposes, will be chaired by the SGC-MMC Chief Justice, and will proceed as follows:

1) Opening statement by the SGC-MMC Chief Justice.

2) Opening statement by the SGC official under investigation.

3) Questions to the SGC official under investigation from the SGC-MMC Justices.

(vi)       In order to hear evidence regarding the charges, witnesses may be questioned by the SGC-MMC Justices and then by the SGC official under investigation. Questions suggested by the SGC official under investigation shall be directed to the Chair of the judicial hearing rather than to the witness directly. This method is to preserve the education tone of the hearing and to avoid the creation of an adversarial environment.

(vii)      Follow up questions to the SGC official under investigation may be asked by from the SGC-MMC Justices.

(viii)     Closing statements from the SGC official under investigation.

(ix)       SGC-MMC Chief Justice brings hearing to closure.

(b)        Upon conclusion of the hearing, the SGC-MMC Judicial Board will move into deliberations (decision and determination).   The Judicial Board’s determination of “responsible” or “not responsible“guilty” or “not guilty” will be based solely on the information presented at the hearing using the standard of “preponderance of evidence”. Determination may be made by a 50%+1 vote of the SGC-MMC Judicial Board.

(c)        The SGC official under investigation will receive written notice within ten (10) business days regarding the outcome of the hearing.

(d)       The SGC official under investigation has the right to challenge the inclusion of any Judicial Board member in the hearing. This challenge must be submitted at least three (3) business days prior to the scheduled hearing.  The challenge must be in writing, and be based on cause, which clearly provides evidence of a conflict of interest, bias, pressure, or influence that could preclude a fair and impartial hearing.  The Vice President of Student Affairs or designee will rule on all such challenges, and his/her decision is final.

(e)        After deliberations in the hearing, the Judicial Board may remove the SGC official under investigation with a majority vote of the Judicial Board.

 

In favor: 22; Opposed: 1; Abstentions: 0; Status: : Passed.